Player-friendly and -unfriendly effects

[angelfromanotherpin]

A player-unfriendly effect is one that directly removes the ability of a player to play the game. You probably know the kind of thing I'm talking about: Hold Person, Dominate Person, Flesh to Stone, etc. The kind of thing that when a PC is affected by them, the player becomes a spectator.

I have no problem with players using such effects on NPCs, because the DM's ability to play the game isn't limited to a single character. At the same time, I'm still hesitant to put such effects into PC hands, in case of inter-party strife.

I have seen some effects which take up the slack of player-unfriendly effects. These effects can seriously impact a PC's tactical options, but don't reduce them to just watching. In fact, some of them seem to draw players further into the game, as they ponder how to get out of the tactical puzzle they've been put in. These more player-friendly effects include:

• Charm effects, if stripped of that pesky 'command with opposed Charisma check' clause, can be quite entertaining. The caster essentially removes himself from the target's list of opponents. When the charmed character then sees two of his 'friends' fighting, it's a good opportunity to see what that character's response would be. Stay out of it? Attempt to separate them? Subdue the one who attacked first?

• Drain Away Speed, from Arcana Evolved, which can reduce a creature's movement rate to 0, so Move actions become functionally impossible, but Standard and Move-Equivalent are still available. This one doesn't have as much effect on spellcasters unfortunately.

• Slow, naturally. Once again, since all most spellcasters need is their Standard action, this is less effective on them. Maybe more spells should be Full actions to cast?

• I'd like to see more effects like this, e.g. an effect that gives a character all the downsides of being Helpless except the inability to take actions. Lots of running around to avoid Coup-de Grace, lots of vulnerability to Sneak Attack, etc.

Anyway, thoughts?

[Fwib]

Don't forget loss of hitpoints and death effects! those can easily reduce the player to a spectator too!

[angelfromanotherpin]

1178467564[/unixtime]]Don't forget loss of hitpoints and death effects! those can easily reduce the player to a spectator too!

Yeah, death is harsh that way. At the same time, most effects which make a character actually dead are given higher costs than effects which make a character only functionally dead.

I am opposed to save-or-die effects. I think anything that's going to kill you should have to go through your hit points. Negative levels are also an acceptable damage-form, if they can't become permanent level-loss. Ability-damage can work, but since it doesn't scale well with level gain and involves mid-combat recalculation, I'm not a big fan.

[Endovior]

Negative levels aren't that bad; even if 'permanent', a good Restoration can get rid of them, and you'll probably have access to or be able to purchase such magic by the time you fight things that can inflict them.

Death effects are worse; particularly if the players don't have any warning. Of course, this entirely depends on how easy it is to reverse death. Notably, if there was some way of getting rid of the level loss caused by returning from the dead (short of 9th level spells, that is...), then death wouldn't nearly be as bad.

[User3]

Blindness is good, since the character can still act, they just don't have LOS anywhere, and will miss half the time with their attacks.

Messing with LOS/LOE in general is a great way to hamper the players while still letting them act.

Look at various status conditions: blinded, deafened, entangled, exhausted, nauseated, prone, and shaken/sickened all provide various penalties but still let the characters act.

[Brobdingnagian]

Craft Contingent Spell - Planeshift if I fall unconscious.
Craft Contingent Spell - Planeshift if I say the safe word.
Craft Contingent Spell - Planeshift if I die.

Go to Ysgard.